A Catholic church’s music director is a “minister” and therefore ineligible to bring employment discrimination claims against the Church, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, implementing a new U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
Phillip Cannata worked as the music director for St. John Neumann Catholic Church, part of the Catholic Diocese of Austin. He oversaw the music department’s budget, maintained the music equipment and played the piano during Mass. After about nine years in this position, the church fired Cannata for insubordination.
He sued, alleging that he was fired based on his age and a disability, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas dismissed his suit, finding it was barred by the U.S. Constitution’s ministerial exception. The exception, which ensures religious entities have full control over minister selection, was upheld earlier this year by the Supreme Court in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC (see Supreme Court Upholds Religious School Exemption; Employee Not Protected Under ADA.)
Cannata appealed, arguing that he was not barred from suing for employment discrimination because he was not a minister: he merely played the piano at Mass, balanced the music budget and maintained the equipment. The diocese, however, argued that Cannata was a minister because music plays an important role in the celebration of Mass.
Unfortunately for lower courts and employers, the Supreme Court’s Hosanna-Tabor ruling “explicitly rejected the adoption of a ‘rigid formula’ or bright-line test,” the court said. So while that ruling provides some guidance, “[a]ny attempt to calcify the particular considerations that motivated the Court in Hosanna–Tabor into a ‘rigid formula’ would not be appropriate.”
However, while the ruling may not provide a one-size-fits-all test for the ministerial exception, there is enough information “for us to conclude that, under the circumstances, Cannata falls within the ministerial exception,” the 5th Circuit said.
Cannata played an important role in the celebration of Mass and his lack of formal training or ordination is insufficient to insulate him from the ministerial exception, the court concluded.
“[T]he intent of the ministerial exception is to allow religious organizations to … adhere to their own religious interpretations,” the 5th Circuit explained. “Therefore, it is not for a court to say whom the Catholic Church may consider a lay ecclesial minister[.] Rather, the ministerial exception permits the church to pick its own ministers and do so using its own criteria.”
Just as the Hosanna–Tabor Court refused to scrutinize the church’s decision, “we may not second-guess whom the Catholic Church may consider a lay liturgical minister under canon law,” the court concluded, barring Cannata’s suit. (Cannata v. Catholic Diocese of Austin, No. 11–51151, 2012 WL 5240836 (5th Cir. Oct. 24, 2012))
For additional information about discrimination in the workplace, see Thompson’s employment law library, including the ADA Compliance Guide.